一道prep的题目～～临近考试了却发现自己做逻辑的思路好像有点问题了

apriltong

Kitchen magazine plans to license the use of its name by a line of cookware.  For a magazine, licensing the use of its name for products involves some danger, since if the products disappoint consumers, the magazine's reputation suffers, with consequent reductions in circulation and advertising.  However, experts have evaluated the cookware and found it superior to all other cookware advertised in Kitchen.  Therefore, Kitchen can collect its licensing fee without endangering its other revenues.
The argument above assumes which of the following?
A. No other line of cookware is superior to that which will carry the Kitchen name.
B. Kitchen will not license the use of its name for any products other than the line of cookware.
C. Makers of cookware will not find Kitchen a less attractive advertising vehicle because the magazine's name is associated with a competing product.
D. Consumers who are not regular readers of Kitchen magazine will be attracted to the cookware by the Kitchen name.
E. Kitchen is one of the most prestigious cooking-related magazines.



正确答案是C
文中的结论是这本杂志可以收取license fee并且不会损害到它的收入。
原因是专家发现kitchen要命名的cookware比其他在kitchen上做广告的质量要好，所以不会使消费者失望而影响到它的收入。
我想专家只是和在kitchen上做过广告的cookware比较，没有和别的产品比较啊，所以选了A。
能不能帮我解释下是为什么呀？还有我的想法哪里错了？

firexxfire

弥小岛 发表于 2016-6-27 22:50
当时错选了B因为是这么想的：如果不授权给其他产品，那么也不会因为消费者不buy in其他产品损害杂志名誉 是 ...

同意！               

firexxfire

想选B取非后是 kitchen杂志会冠名其他产品，也就是说有可能会冠名质量差的产品，其收入会降低，削弱了结论？
感觉这个思路是跟着premise的。。。

Bensontuo

Spot the question type: Assumption ( necessary )

Structure of the argument:

Background scenarios, a possible causation introduced, a reason given to support that causation, concession to undermine that possible causation with other support, a new conclusion introduced as a conditional logic

Core of the argument.

The cause of the original causation could be avoided by the other cause, and if that's case, a possible causation could happened and lead to the next step, as the new effect.

So, If superior to all other cookware advertised in Kitchen, product must not disappoint consumer, and if not disappoint consumer, magazine's reputation would not suffers, and if the reputation not suffers, revenues would not be endangered, then kitchen must be able to collect license fee.

所以這裡的重點為何？  ” 因為“ 這條生產線的產品比其他的產品都還優越, 所以當使用雜誌的名字命名此廚具設備時, 雜誌的”名聲“不會下降。

而, 雜誌的名聲不會下降為原因保證了雜誌必定不傷及其他利益的前提下, 收回license fee.


必要假設為何？

沒有其他的因素會發生來阻止雜誌收回license fee 的情況下傷及自己的利益。

Ａ. Premise booster , 只是重新重複了一次支持而已

B. 這不對, " any " 非必要。  

C. 取非後發現 other revenue 會被傷害到, 因為其他廠商不願意跟雜誌合作了。 正確答案

D. 無關

E. 無關

草鱼1991

小circle 发表于 2018-9-27 19:24
mark一下

这道题让自己怀疑智商，重新捋一下，希望大家帮助纠正。
1.首先问题问的是，以下哪个是根据上述论证的猜想？我的理解：猜想可以是顺逻辑（得出以上结论，就是不会影响其他部分的收入），也可以是逆逻辑（会影响以上收入）
2.c选项其实我有点不理解为什么这么翻译：其他的厨具制造商会认为Kitchen杂志是一个没什么吸引力的杂志因为这个杂志的名字被和竞争对手的品牌联系在了一起。
C. Makers of cookware will not find Kitchen a lessattractive advertising vehicle because the magazine's name is associated with acompeting product。
（我的理解：其他厨具厂商不会发现厨房杂志不那么有效，因为他们和其他竞品品牌有联系。按照我的翻译就变成其实其他厂商认为这个品牌是有效的。）   
3. 如果按照正确的理解：其他的厨具制造商会认为Kitchen杂志是一个没什么吸引力的杂志因为这个杂志的名字被和竞争对手的品牌联系在了一起。

前提（因）是：“专家评估了该厨具厂商并且发现它的质量是超过所有在Kitchen这本杂志上做广告的其他厂商的”

结论（果）是：“Kitchen可以收取牌照费而不需要担心它的其他收入了”

我的理解：选择c是因为，如果其他厂商认为这个品牌没有什么吸引力，所以不会投广告，那么实际上是影响了厨房杂志的其他收入的，因为其他收入包含这个广告收入。

——————————————

以上三个理解，希望nn可以帮助纠正或确认是否有偏差～

而还有一个问题一直困扰我，是当我做因果题的时，前提结论都找的很好，一到选项就不会做；拿到正选后又能很好的捋出逻辑连。求NN指引

草鱼1991

小circle 发表于 2018-9-27 19:24
mark一下

这道题让自己怀疑智商，重新捋一下，希望大家帮助纠正。

小陈冲鸭

laughingwind 发表于 2017-12-15 17:51
对A选项进行取非，成为：存在其他更好的厨具。而原文说，只有当这个代言的厨具让消费者失望了，杂志的声誉 ...

同意！               

小circle

[size%3D2][url%3Dforum.php?mod%3Dredirect%26goto%3Dfindpost%26pid%3D23550396%26ptid%3D1301141][color%3D%23999999]发表于 2017-07-18 14%3A09%3A50[/url]
Kitchen magazine plans to license the use of its name by a line of cookware. &nbsp;For a magazine, licensing the use of its name for products involves some danger, since if the products disappoint consumers, the magazine's reputation suffers, with consequent reductions in circulation and advertising. &nbsp;However, experts have evaluated the cookware and found it superior to all other cookware advertised in Kitchen. &nbsp;Therefore, Kitchen can collect its licensing fee without endangering its other revenues.<br />The argument above assumes which of the following?<br />A. No other line of cookware is superior to that which will carry the Kitchen name.<br />B. Kitchen will not license the use of its name for any products other than the line of cookware.<br />C. Makers of cookware will not find Kitchen a less attractive advertising vehicle because the magazine's name is associated with a competing product.<br />D. Consumers who are not regular readers of Kitchen magazine will be attracted to the cookware by the Kitchen name.<br />E. Kitchen is one of the most prestigious cooking-related magazines.<br /><br /><br /><br />正确答案是C<br />文中的结论是这本杂志可以收取license fee并且不会损害到它的收入。<br />原因是专家发现kitchen要命名的cookware比其他在kitchen上做广告的质量要好，所以不会使消费者失望而影响到它的收入。<br />我想专家只是和在kitchen上做过广告的cookware比较，没有和别的产品比较啊，所以选了A。<br />能不能帮我解释下是为什么呀？还有我的想法哪里错了？

mark一下

kluivert

题目读清楚怎么可能做错呢？  without endangering its other revenues


一定要看清前提，结论，问题...  做错题大部分情况下都是没看清

绿杨小庙

GMAC是不会给你加other的，因为makers中的“s”就暗示了是其他制造商，不能把makers理解成生产者，因为毕竟不是生产者直接找杂志做广告